ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > The perfect line and other riding myths
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-12-2013, 07:39 AM   #316
ph0rk
Doesn't Care
 
ph0rk's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Oaktown
Oddometer: 2,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttpete View Post
Because the public needs protection from others.
That's the same thing as the public needing protection from itself.


Drivers are licensed so the privilege can be taken away when someone fucks up.
__________________
--Semantics are everything.
ph0rk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 07:42 AM   #317
ttpete
Rectum Non Bustibus
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Dearborn, MI
Oddometer: 5,308
Quote:
Originally Posted by ph0rk View Post
That's the same thing as the public needing protection from itself.


Drivers are licensed so the privilege can be taken away when someone fucks up.
An individual should be allowed to do something that's hazardous to himself as long as it's not hazardous to anyone else.
__________________
10 Ducati 1098 Streetfighter S - "Sleipnir"
09 Kaw Versys
67 Triumph Bonneville TT Special
"The problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money" _____ Margaret Thatcher
ttpete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 08:03 AM   #318
ph0rk
Doesn't Care
 
ph0rk's Avatar
 
Joined: Dec 2009
Location: Oaktown
Oddometer: 2,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttpete View Post
An individual should be allowed to do something that's hazardous to himself as long as it's not hazardous to anyone else.
Yes, and someone trying to squint through 70 mph of wind and rain on a naked bike in the oncoming lane is hazardous to me.
__________________
--Semantics are everything.
ph0rk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 09:27 AM   #319
randyo
Beastly Adventurer
 
randyo's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2007
Location: Northern NewEngland
Oddometer: 1,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by ph0rk View Post
it seems to me that at the least, eye protection should be mandatory in the same way that an uncracked windshield is mandatory. Especially on bikes with less wind protection, I can't believe riders with no helmet and no goggles or glasses can see adequately to maneuver safely at high speeds due to windblast alone.

if the public doesn't need protection from itself, why bother with licensing in the first place?
here in NH, eye protection IS mandatory, helmets are not

eye protection can be in the form of goggles, safety glasses, helmet visor or windshield (I think has to extend 14" above handlebar ?) I'm covered wearing prescription glasses
__________________
RandyO
IBA # 9560
07 VeeStrom
99 SV650
82 XV920R
A man with a gun is a citizen
A man without a gun is a subject
randyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 11:24 PM   #320
PhilB
Beastly Adventurer
 
PhilB's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Location: New Hampshire
Oddometer: 1,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by DOGSROOT View Post
Except that Shakespeare didn't mangle the English language.

Re-read the first sentence.
.
.
.
It's a bit awkward, but it parses correctly. Shakespeare, OTOH, mangled the English language extensively. Indeed it was part of his artfulness, and done at a level that still has rarely been approached by others. Certainly not I.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttpete View Post
An individual should be allowed to do something that's hazardous to himself as long as it's not hazardous to anyone else.
+1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by randyo View Post
here in NH, eye protection IS mandatory, helmets are not

eye protection can be in the form of goggles, safety glasses, helmet visor or windshield (I think has to extend 14" above handlebar ?) I'm covered wearing prescription glasses
Eye protection is mandatory in most states. And it has a much better rationale behind it, as a person riding without being able to see is a hazard to others. I'm not very upset about eye protection laws, as those address the correct subject for a law -- when someone is harming or endangering someone else; which is not the case with helmet laws which are promarily designed to protect someone from himself.

PhilB
__________________
1993 Ducati M900 Monster "Patina" (230,000 miles, so far) -- 1995 Ducati M900 (wife's bike) -- 1972 Honda CB450 (daughter's bike) -- 1979 Vespa P200 (daughter's scoot) -- 1967 Alfa Romeo GT Jr. (1300cc) -- 1964 Vespa GS160 (160cc 2-stroke) -- 1962 Maicoletta scooter (275cc 2-stroke) -- 1960 Heinkel Tourist 103A1 scooter "Elroy" (175cc 4-stroke)
PhilB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 11:30 PM   #321
Multiplicity
Gnarly Adventurer
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Location: Nor-Cal
Oddometer: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilB View Post

Eye protection is mandatory in most states
. And it has a much better rationale behind it, as a person riding without being able to see is a hazard to others. I'm not very upset about eye protection laws, as those address the correct subject for a law -- when someone is harming or endangering someone else; which is not the case with helmet laws which are promarily designed to protect someone from himself.

PhilB

Most states make it mandatory, 35 MPH and above Michigan is one of them.
Multiplicity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 11:31 PM   #322
Wraith Rider
Beastly Adventurer
 
Wraith Rider's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2012
Location: Germany
Oddometer: 1,041
However, as far as I know, it's not mandatory to have the visor of your full face helmet closed.
__________________
"Why not stay in disguise all the time? You know, look like everyone else."
"Because we shouldn't have to."
Wraith Rider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2013, 11:33 PM   #323
PhilB
Beastly Adventurer
 
PhilB's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2012
Location: New Hampshire
Oddometer: 1,326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wraith Rider View Post
However, as far as I know, it's not mandatory to have the visor of your full face helmet closed.
At least some states I've ridden in, if you have the visor open, and do not have other eye protection, you can be cited for lack of eye protection.

PhilB
__________________
1993 Ducati M900 Monster "Patina" (230,000 miles, so far) -- 1995 Ducati M900 (wife's bike) -- 1972 Honda CB450 (daughter's bike) -- 1979 Vespa P200 (daughter's scoot) -- 1967 Alfa Romeo GT Jr. (1300cc) -- 1964 Vespa GS160 (160cc 2-stroke) -- 1962 Maicoletta scooter (275cc 2-stroke) -- 1960 Heinkel Tourist 103A1 scooter "Elroy" (175cc 4-stroke)
PhilB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2013, 05:30 AM   #324
Tripped1
Likely Lost.
 
Tripped1's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2009
Location: Sandy Eggo
Oddometer: 6,893
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilB View Post
At least some states I've ridden in, if you have the visor open, and do not have other eye protection, you can be cited for lack of eye protection.

PhilB

I've gotten pulled over for that.

I had sunglasses on under my visor and the office behind me only saw that the visor was up. He just checked my paperwork and let me go.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by RottenScummyTroll View Post
Show folks something with a clutch and carburetor, and it's like teaching a baboon to use a Macbook.
Tripped1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 12:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014